Skip to content
Mitigating the Barriers

Standards

Recommended approach for standards
4
Title
Mitigation type
Implementation
Strategy description
Tim's comments
Technical effort
Pointer to Tech Doc
Stakeholder Effort
Existing case study
Benefits
Measure of progress
1
Accessibility
Standards
ODI working collaboratively at national level
The accessibility aids available to an activity can be described in two parts, The first are those that are part of the venue where the activity is taking place and the second are those associated with the activity itself.

It is generally agreed that a taxonomy would best describe the accessibility of a venue and activity. As venues are common to all sectors then it is recommended that OA (ODI) should work with a cross sector governance group and a leading disability group to agree an accessibility taxonomy. This research has engaged
but this is currently a private sector business model. If an accessibility taxonomy can be agreed then OA should adopt an appropriate subset to establish their Activity accessibility taxonomy.
This will require the OA technical lead to engage in this process. This project has made connections with the NHS, LGA and MHCLG. It is recommended to liaise with these contacts to start the process.
M - It would make sense to involve managers of social prescribers in this process as they have access to the Service Users, Social Prescribers and Activity Providers. AcP - This has to be easy for someone to tick boxes for their organisation and easily inherit the org ticks as a default for each activity. Ideally venue should be out of scope for OA. ApP - This requires a change to those collecting and those finding. Can there be a central component to reduce development costs?
Improves means to identify appropriate activity
2
Date last updated
Standards
ODI working collaboratively at national level
OA has the ability to recognise when the data was last updated through the last modified data in the feed. This will be made more prominent as a last-updated field to give confidence to the social-prescriber. It is also recommended to include an assurance-date which is looking to future proof OA as whilst assurance is not currently perceived an issue, it could become one.
proposes that Modified and Assured date/time attributes be added to the data structure.
AcP - Need to add a last self-assured date to give confidence in their data
Improves confidence in the data
3
Target audience
Standards
ODI working collaboratively at national level
Any frontline organisation, e.g. council, charity, Police, NHS, Housing etc, may make referrals to sessions delivered by local activity providers’. Each sector will have their own definitions of audiences categories and related taxonomies. It would be unfair to expect the Activity Providers to align their activities against every sectors different set of audience categories.

As with the
@Accessibility
strategy, it is recommended that the OA (ODI) work with a cross-sector governance body to agree a
This should be relatively short and focus on key need groups e.g. partially sighted. This will allow each of the sectors to map their own taxonomy e.g. Snomed (
) to the cross-sector target audience which will then allow applications to filter out appropriate activities based on e.g. a Snomed term.

Part of the
@Social-Prescribing-Ready Profile
Similar effort to Accessibility strategy.
M - It would make sense to include managers targeting particular groups of people
Improves means to identify appropriate activity
4
Client readiness
Standards
ODI working collaboratively at national level
There is concern from Social Prescribers that their client may not be ready for an activity. Generally the OA data set is being reviewed to give a richer set of data to provide enough information for the SPLW to make the best decision concerning their client needs.

The
@Intensity levels
strategy is probably a good one to consider. Also the
@Activity further info
will help.

This strategy is for the activity provider to develop a readiness check that the
@SPLW
can carry out with their client and decide whether the client would be ‘ready’ for the activity. This would probably be carried out normally when the client first joined the session but to avoid making it more difficult for the client this allows the check to be performed by the
@SPLW
.

The readiness check could be based on a national standard check e.g. Par-q or their own but it should advise whether the activity is appropriate to the
@SPLW
client. The readiness check should be on the activity providers website such that a link can be added to the OA data for the
@SPLW
to access. This will mean that both the activity provider and the
@SPLW
can focus on providing the best match to client needs.

Part of the
@Social-Prescribing-Ready Profile
Add an ability to hold a link to a readiness check to the OA opportunity data set
FW - follow the link and complete the readiness check with SU OAApP - include the gallery link in their UI AcP - This will need setting up on an their website M - This could be activity specific and therefor a link to a general readiness check for that activity SPApP - allow SPLW to view readiness link
Increases likelihood of referring a physical activity
5
Client activity confident
Standards
ODI working collaboratively at national level
Clients often need motivating and will lack confidence to attend a session that they have not been to before. The
@SPLW
can consider the
@Activity buddy
strategy or even the
@Holistic approach
strategy but a really popular suggested strategy is to provide information about the activity through photos. This is not dissimilar to how people might choose to buy their house, a holiday, a car etc. A gallery link could show photos of inside the venue and include describing accessibility as per AirBnB case study. It could include photos of the activity in session, meet the team, what the entrance and reception looks like and whatever else the activity provider wishes to show.
Add an ability to hold a gallery link into the OA opportunity data set
FW - simply review the check list OAApP - include the gallery link in their UI AcP - create a gallery of photos for their activities SPApP - allow SPLW to view gallery link
Increases likelihood of attending an activity
6
Activity-type groups
Standards
ODI working collaboratively at national level
OA has a comprehensive list of activity types but this is only really useful to the SPLW when they know specifically what the client is looking for. The SPLW needs to have a way to find the best activity. The
@Pathways
strategy offers one route. The activity-type list is difficult to navigate / search as it is not very broad at the top and so more broader layers could be added e.g. indoor physical sports, indoor physical team sports, indoor non-contact sports, indoor team non-contact sports etc. This would allow the SPLW to consider a smaller number of potential activity groupings to identify potentially well-matched actual activities.
@SPLW
are also familiar with the Open Referral UK standards which includes a Service-type. This is a broader set of services which includes some physical activity types. See
@OR and OA roadmaps
MIKE TO COMMENT
Enhance the OA Activity-type taxonomy to include high level broad terms to group activity types to allow the narrowing to those of interest to a SPLW client
M & FW - develop a high level pathway structure to sit on top of the activity types
LGA Service-types
Improves means to identify appropriate activity
7
Attending-type
Standards
ODI working collaboratively at national level
@SPLW
have indicated that they would like to know if the session is for self, 1to1 or in a group as usually they favour the 1to1 and groups.

Open referral has a field called attending-type which gives an indication of the type of attendance - is it a home visit, an online session, an app, a telephone call or a physical venue?

It is suggested to include this field in OA with the extended definitions for physical venue i.e. venue self, venue 1to1, venue group. This might also help with the current Covid restrictions and potential new normal to offer online services e.g. Zoom trainer.

Part of the
@Social-Prescribing-Ready Profile
Add a controlled list field similar to attending-type in OR
FW - simply review the attending-type when discussing with client OAApP - include the attending-type in their UI AcP - complete the attending-type checklist for their activity SPApP - provide filters for the attending-type
Improves means to identify appropriate activity
8
Provider quality assurance
Standards
ODI working collaboratively at national level
There are issues of trust with activity quality especially with smaller community groups. The risks should be a case by case risk management decision and the richer data will provide evidence to help that decision. The quality of the activity could be trusted through the quality of the provider.

Sport England have an existing quality standard called Quest.
@Quest Quality standard
MCRActive are doing their own quality check e.g. whether a safeguarding policy is in place. It would make sense if this was a cross-sector initiative but should at least be a cross geographical boundary standard. There are two considerations. Firstly that a common standard is adopted - such as Quest. The second is considering how compliance to that standard is assessed.

This strategy suggests that consideration is given to the ‘Active’ areas trusting each other’s quality kitemark. This may use the same standard as other areas, but in terms of trusting the assessment undertaken this should start across the 33 Active Partnerships borders. The issue with having a wider shared inspection / assessment Geography is not about the trust in the assessment process, but that actually most of the risks / issues tend to relate to provider management. Hence if Provider A is OK in location A, this is no guarantee that the same provider will be OK, 100 miles away, as the management control will be very different.
Technically this would mean an assurance system outside of OA data but adding a reference and a link to verify the accreditation.

Care should be taken as to not burden the small activity providers too much and also not to under promote those without this quality standard as the client may trust their local church even without a quality kitemark.

Note Open Referral allows many quality reviews which could be a local CVS (Council for Voluntary Sector) kitemark, NHS social prescribing kitemark, Active kitemark, CQC or Ofsted etc.
Add a field for a reference with a link to verify the quality standard or a data set similar to OR’s Quality review.

FW - simply review the quality reviews when discussing with client OAApP - include the quality review in their UI AcP - complete the quality review field for their organisation SPApP - provide filters for the quality review
Improves confidence in the data
9
Booking
Standards
ODI working collaboratively at national level
OA has an open booking standard which if implemented would allow the
@SPLW
, having found an activity in the opportunity data, to then immediately make a booking without having to go through a separate booking process to find that there are no spaces available.

At this moment in time, having the ability to easily make a booking for a specific session is not deemed a priority for a
@SPLW
. This is because the SPLW is quite prepared to do whatever it takes to get their client to an activity. They are happy to make a phone-call, send an email or even visit a venue to make the booking.

They do accept that having a field that tells them how to make the booking would be useful i.e. which phone number, email or even a weblink.

However, it has to be recognised that Social Prescribing is an emerging practice and there are some concerns about SPLWs spending too much time with clients. As Social Prescribing picks up pace then it does seem likely that being able to quickly book a session will become important.

It is expected that Open Referral will also start to want to be able to book services as the momentum builds for using that open data set.

This strategy recommends using the existing field in OA to indicate the means to make a booking but that the open booking demand is likely to come as Social prescribing progresses. However it is not yet known whether Social Prescribing will become business as usual and so investment to promote open booking might be a bit early.
FW - make use of booking link to improve their productivity (this has not been implemented by many applications as yet)
Higher productivity for workers
10
Activity further info
Standards
ODI working collaboratively at national level
The need to understand as much as possible about the activity before a client is signed up is clear. The rich data set should prove adequate but changing OA data set and the knock on effect it has to application providers is significant.

This strategy suggests including activity further information links that can be added for the activity provider to add what they think might be useful e.g. FAQ, FB page link, taster sessions adverts, SP only sessions adverts. There should be a text description field for every link and it would make sense to categorise these (FAQ, Social media link, promotions, directions, special notices etc) as this will also give some help as to the sort of thing that an activity provider could provide.

Part of the
@Social-Prescribing-Ready Profile
Add a text field, link and controlled list to OA opportunity dataset
AcP - Adding in extra information to help understand more about the session
Improves means to identify appropriate activity
11
Intensity levels
Standards
ODI working collaboratively at national level
It is generally accepted that there are three levels of intensity for physical activity - Low, Moderate and Vigorous. If this was a well defined standard then it would make it easier for
@SPLW
to know for sure that the activity providers were aligning to the same understanding of intensity levels.

This strategy suggests that the OA data set includes a controlled list with descriptions for activity providers to describe their intensity level and for the
@SPLW
to understand what might be appropriate for their client.

The key is agreeing the definitions which won’t be easy but should be worthwhile and could be added to the cross-sector taxonomy strategies. The science around MET may be able to provide a relatively easy calculation for an individual but needs expert input .

Part of the
@Social-Prescribing-Ready Profile
AcP - Add intensity levels to their session
Improves means to identify appropriate activity
12
OR and OA roadmaps
Standards
ODI working collaboratively at national level
Some
@SPLW
were aware of the Open Referral data standard and many Application providers have all been made aware of it as the NHS HSSF
are currently considering it as one of their standards required for Social Prescribing software.
@#r32
. They don’t publish their requirements until the end of 2021. They are looking at recommending that Open Referral UK is adopted as a means to access data from service directories. They are also now considering OpenActive.

There are different strengths and weaknesses in both standards. Frontline workers across the public and third sector are likely to want to understand what services and activities are ‘out there’ in the local community.

This strategy is suggesting that these two open data standards would benefit from identifying a roadmap which would see them merging over a period of time. It is recognised that existing investment has been made on both sides and hence the ‘over time’ suggestion would give fair warning but going forward would appear to be complementary, favourable to the investors and make better use of public sector investment.

The risk to both standards of not merging is that it will create unnecessary competition and costs between them to become The defacto standard, extra cost for the application providers, confusion for the service/activity providers and ultimately the frontline missing out on knowing what is available without needing two different tools. An alternative strategy would be
@Converting data to and from OA and OR
.
A governance model would be required to oversee a merging roadmap. This would take quite a bit of effort and need lengthy discussion and compromise in order to agree a way forward.
ODI to consider recommendations
Aligns OA with other data/systems
13
Activity facilitation
Standards
It is important to
@SPLW
s that the activity ‘looks after’ their client. Understanding what facilitation is available is a key requirement. It is a helpful to a client to know if there is a reception, someone who will welcome or meet & greet, whether there is an activity lead to seek help from and what additional support is available e.g. activity helper, befriender, carer. This information can be included in the OA data set. An activity provider looking to accept SPLW clients should be encouraged to complete this information. See
@Completeness checker

Part of the
@Social-Prescribing-Ready Profile
FW - simply review the check list OAApP - include the checklist in their UI AcP - complete the checklist for their activity SPApP - provide filters for the checklist
Improves means to identify appropriate activity
No results from filter
Want to print your doc?
This is not the way.
Try clicking the ⋯ next to your doc name or using a keyboard shortcut (
CtrlP
) instead.